24 May 1998 Mr. F. C. Altizer, Jr., Administrator Salem District Office Virginia Department of Transportation Post Office Box 3071 Salem, Virginia 24153 Re: Interstate 73 meeting of May 14, 1998 Dear Mr. Altizer: 1. Please include my comments regarding the transportation system in the official transcript of the meeting. However, please exclude my telephone number from any publication freely distributed to the general public. These comments will be posted soon at . 2. The world will be a very different place in two or three generations. The decisions made now will have great bearing on whether our communities function efficiently and easily in the future, or whether we may find ourselves hampered by the cost of removing the remains of an obsolete transportation superstructure while trying to create one that is useful. 3. According to VDOT, the possibility of routing Interstate 73 over Bent Mountain was scrapped because local residents called in state legislators. I agree with that decision. Moreover, I ask that all Virginians receive the same consideration, regardless of wealth, education, or political access. I'd like to see the Secretariat of Transportation adopt a policy requiring that every member of the public be treated the way members of the General Assembly are treated. What is the current policy? How difficult would it be to mandate equal treatment for all Virginians? 4. A self-selected advisory committee should be convened for this project, open to any member of the public who is willing to participate. Otherwise, the decisions are likely to be made by people with financial interests in construction and trucking, rather than those who place their foremost concern with our homes and communities. 5. The state should consider and compare all routing options for the Interstate 73 corridor now known or presented by the public, including the following: 6. Capacity and safety improvements to US 220; 7. Railroad by way of Winston-Salem, Martinsville, Ferrum, Rocky Mount, Boones Mill, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 8. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Martinsville, Ferrum, Rocky Mount, Boones Mill, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 9. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Martinsville, Ferrum, Rocky Mount, Boones Mill, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 10. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Danville, Martinsville, Ferrum, Rocky Mount, Boones Mill, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 11. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Danville, Gretna, Rocky Mount, Boones Mill, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 12. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Danville, Gretna, Hurt, Moneta and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 13. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Danville, Gretna, Alta Vista, Lynchburg, Bedford, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 14. Railroad by way of Greensboro, Danville, Gretna, Alta Vista, Lynchburg, Glasgow, Buchanan, and Roanoke, with improvements to the tracks and grade for simultaneous passage of passengers and freight in both directions; 15. Capacity and safety improvements to US 220 and railroad tracks; 16. Installation of a longer, stronger guard rail at the dangerous curve near Fork Mountain (with no other change); 17. Capacity and safety improvements to US 220, with addition of bypasses at Boones Mill and Fork Mountain; 18. Road by way of Mount Airy, Fancy Gap, Fort Chiswell, Glenvar, Poages Mill, Clearbrook, Roanoke, Staunton, Elkins, Morgantown, Pittsburgh; 19. Road by way of Winston-Salem, Danville, Lynchburg, Bedford, Chamblissburg, Vinton, Roanoke, Clearbrook, Poages Mill, Glenvar, Wytheville, Bluefield; 20. Road by way of Winston-Salem, Danville, South Boston, Lynchburg, Bedford, Chamblissburg, Vinton, Roanoke, Clearbrook, Poages Mill, Glenvar, Wytheville, Bluefield; 21. Road by way of Winston-Salem, Danville, Lynchburg, Bedford, Chamblissburg, Vinton, Roanoke, Clearbrook, Poages Mill, Salem, Staunton, Elkins, Morgantown, Pittsburgh; 22. Road by way of Winston-Salem, Danville, South Boston, Lynchburg, Bedford, Chamblissburg, Vinton, Roanoke, Clearbrook, Poages Mill, Salem, Staunton, Elkins, Morgantown, Pittsburgh; 23. Road by way of Mount Airy, Fancy Gap, Fort Chiswell, Christiansburg, Adney Gap, Boones Mill, Clearbrook, Poages Mill, Salem, Staunton, Elkins, Morgantown, Pittsburgh; 24. Road by way of Mount Airy, Fancy Gap, Fort Chiswell, Christiansburg, Adney Gap, Boones Mill, Clearbrook, Poages Mill, Salem, Vinton, Chamblissburg, Bedford, Lynchburg, Glasgow, Staunton, Elkins, Morgantown, Pittsburgh; 25. Road by way of Stewartsville and Vinton, which I understand would be the lowest altitude possible and therefore advantageous for safety in fog and storms; 26. Road from Boones Mill northwest along corridor #105 to a point south of the Blue Ridge Parkway, then west along corridor #371 to Glenvar; 27. Road by way of Adney Gap, Bent Mountain, and Christiansburg; 28. Crossing the Blue Ridge by means of a tunnel; 29. No construction. 30. I understand that although many alternatives have been suggested, only a few are being considered. I have been informed that any alternative that does not fall within a narrow study corridor in Franklin and Henry Counties is being disregarded by your department. I further understand that the only alternatives that will be considered all involve the inherently dangerous and inefficient mode of transportation that employs vehicles with small motors operated on a monotonously flat, hard surface by lonely individuals. That means that if an alternative route through an adjacent or distant county will provide substantially greater benefit at substantially lower cost, it will not be evaluated. It means that if rail transportation will provide substantially greater benefit at substantially lower cost, it will not be evaluated. What, if any, mechanism is available to members of the public who might wish to evaluate such alternatives? 31. I understand that several alternatives I suggested were disqualified because they fell outside the scope of the study. I am recommending them again because I believe they are worthy of comparison with the alternatives that are being studied. I would like to know specific reasons for rejection of each of my suggestions. 32. Including mine, how many alternatives that have been suggested were omitted from the May newsletter? I am concerned that the public may erroneously infer that they were never suggested. Surely, it is VDOT's responsibility to avoid misinforming the public. Might it be possible for VDOT to publish the unacknowledged alternatives and put them on display at the next meeting? 33. Which lobbyists have been involved in promoting legislation that has defined the study corridor so narrowly? 34. I understand that the public was only notified of the official "Conceptual Corridors" a few days before the hearings, if that. 35. I understand that these corridors have the following properties: 36. Paving in any corridor passing through or near Boones Mill would exacerbate an existing flooding problem. 37. Use of corridor #105 north of the Blue Ridge Parkway would involve the acquisition of expensive commercial land near Starkey Road, even though cheaper land is available. 38. Corridor #118B crosses the Blue Ridge at Crowell Gap, a steep, peaceful, picturesque pass whose character would be irrevocably changed by excavation and construction. 39. Widening of the existing road through corridor #118C would require the relocation of most businesses in Clearbrook. 40. Much of corridor #153 is redundant, as it would duplicate an existing bypass just to the west. 41. Part of corridor #237B is redundant, as it would duplicate an existing bypass just to the east. 42. Corridors #287 and #289A lead up the Blue Ridge to Windy Gap, a steep slope developed with homes. 43. Corridor #294 would involve leveling miles of the Blue Ridge. 44. Corridors #329 and #369 would require paving a timbered portion of the watershed of the Martinsville reservoir, leading to water contamination. 45. The portion of corridor #371 in Roanoke County would provide the shortest travel time of any alternative now under consideration. 46. The portion of corridor #371 in Franklin County would require extensive regrading along Naff Road, promoting flooding there and in Boones Mill. 47. Corridor #372 would require razing part of Weaver Knob, interfering with Beaverdam reservoir. 48. Corridor #373 would pass near flood control reservoirs, exacerbating flooding problems. 49. I understand that although Interstate 73 was originally intended to carry trucks between the Midwest and ports on the Atlantic Ocean, it will never serve that purpose. Instead, it will end in Myrtle Beach, which is not a port. Therefore, it will not ultimately be convenient for trucks. 50. I also have some questions about the project. A few of these have already been asked. However, I am putting them in writing to make it clear that I have requested information and await a reply. If there is some reason that a question cannot or will not be answered, please inform me of the reason. 51. Please provide answers for each alternative considered. If an answer cannot be provided, please explain why. Cost 52. Is it more advantageous to build a highway alongside existing roads, to build in a corridor not currently served, or to use the money to upgrade existing roadways? What factors are considered in making such a decision? What factors are not considered? Who decides what factors to consider? 53. Is this the best use we can find for one billion dollars? That works out to $14 million per mile, $2700 per foot, $225 per inch. How many miles of existing road could we improve for the same price? How many children could we educate? 54. It has estimated that for only 20% of the cost of this project, safety improvements can be made so that US 220 will be as safe to travel as an interstate highway. Is that true? That would leave $800 million for other projects. 55. What would be the comparative cost to the U.S. and Virginia taxpayer of each alternative? 56. How much has been and will be paid to consultants for this project? I noticed that the current consultant came from out of the area and seemed unfamiliar with local conditions and geography. Is there any effort to find local expertise? Doesn't VDOT have the personnel to conduct a study? 57. What is the anticipated maintenance cost of each alternative? Who will pay for maintenance? Will maintenance of other roads suffer? Role in Long-distance Transportation 58. What is the comparative road mileage, lane mileage, traffic capacity, and traffic volume in the Interstate, US, and Virginia highway systems? 59. What is the rationale behind designating this road I-73, when it is supposed to be east of I-77? Why doesn't it have a higher number? 60. What is the projected level of traffic that will travel I-73 between South Carolina and Michigan? Why can't I-77 carry this traffic? How long will the trip take? How long does it take now? How long would it take under each alternative? 61. What advantage can a detour through Roanoke offer the long-distance traveller or trucker? What disadvantage? 62. Considering slopes and weather conditions, what is the comparative safety inherent in traffic crossing the Blue Ridge at Fancy Gap, Adney Gap, Boones Mill, Vinton, Villamont, or Glasgow? 63. What is the point of building a highway linking Roanoke to Michigan, when there is at least as noticeable a need for one running north to Pittsburgh? 64. One of the benefits of an interstate highway mentioned by your staff is the safer transportation of hazardous materials. At least one source I have consulted claims that about 90% of collisions involving hazardous materials result from truck transportation. How do the safety records compare for different modes of transportation? 65. As there is a bypass in existence around Rocky Mount, is it necessary to build another? 66. Most vehicles leaving Roanoke for Lynchburg use Orange Avenue, which already has heavy traffic during rush hour. How will this corridor be affected under each alternative? What plans does the state have for traffic to Lynchburg? Effects on Local Transportation 67. How do we make sure that transportation along and across the path of the highway are not hindered? How do we avoid lengthening paths of travel? How do we avoid creating difficulties and hazards for bicycles and pedestrians, including hikers? Is it necessary to replace ground-level roads with overpasses that freeze more quickly in the winter? Where in the corridor are we likely to encounter such problems? 68. Are we likely to see a deterioration in travel time on US 220 if an interstate highway is built near it? What is likely to happen under each alternative? 69. What are the current volume and speed of traffic at rush hour on the Roy L. Webber Expressway in downtown Roanoke? What are the current and projected levels of service? (I understand that current statistics are based on a four-lane highway, not the six-lane highway that now exists.) What volume and speed are expected under each alternative? Will the capacity of the expressway have to be increased? How would this be accomplished? Will widening be necessary? Is there sufficient room? How many homes and businesses would be lost? How much would it cost? Who will pay? Has the money been budgeted? 70. Will traffic volume increase on any local streets, including Rocky Mount's Main Street, Pell Avenue, Yellow Mountain Road, Buck Mountain Road, Blue Ridge Parkway, Electric Road (both near the highway and also the narrower section near Starkey Road), Wonju Street, Colonial Avenue, Franklin Road, Elm Street, Williamson Road, Orange Avenue, Hershberger Road, and Peters Creek Road? How much increase will there be? Will there be any deterioration in speed during rush hour? Will collisions increase? Will it become more dangerous for pedestrians? Will buses be delayed? Will capacity improvements to local streets be necessary? What kind of improvements? Where? How many homes and businesses would be lost? How much will it cost? Who will pay? Has the money been budgeted? Will any economic or ethnic group be disproportionately affected? 71. How will this road affect construction of a highway between Glenvar and Clearbrook, which would carry most traffic between Franklin and Montgomery Counties? How is that project included or anticipated in these plans? Why haven't we heard more about that highway? 72. Will construction and location of a highway interfere in any way with restoration of the railroad between Rocky Mount and Gretna? Environmental Impact 73. Will an environmental impact statement be completed for all of Interstate 73 at one time, or will there be piecemeal evaluation? 74. Considering that much of Franklin County is unzoned, what is the likely density of development along the corridor under each alternative? 75. How much soil is expected to be destabilized by construction under each alternative? 76. How much land will be cleared under each alternative? 77. How much land (in acres and in tons) will be regraded under each alternative? 78. How many construction workers are likely to move to the area? How many are likely to leave when the road is finished? 79. How much traffic will pass through the corridor under each alternative? 80. What is the expected change in noise level near the highway? How does it compare with the noise level if the railroad carried this traffic? 81. What will be the safety impact under each alternative of greater traffic volume near the Roanoke airport? Can this impact be mitigated? 82. What is the expected loss of farmland to roads and development under each alternative? 83. Considering that streams along much of the route tend to flood at times, what is the expected peak runoff under the projected development from each alternative? 84. What quantity and extent of flooding will result from development? 85. What quantity and extent of flooding will result from water channeled along the highway? 86. What are the likely rates of local taxes, under each alternative? 87. What is the projected level of bodily harm from collisions, locally and overall, under each alternative? 88. What is the projected level of crime along the corridor, under each alternative? 89. What is the projected level of drug trafficking likely to pass through the corridor, under each alternative? 90. What are the projected levels of fuel consumption under each alternative? How much of it will be fossil fuel? How much fuel can be generated locally? 91. What are the projected emission levels of CO2, SO2, hydrocarbons, and ozone locally and overall under each alternative? What does this mean to our health? What does it mean to flora and fauna, particularly birds? 92. Will public toilets be provided along the highway? Who will maintain them? How will the effluent be treated? What possible health consequences could there be if toilet facilities are not available? 93. How much salt will be necessary to remove ice from this highway? Will other chemicals be introduced to the area to construct and maintain the road? Where will these chemicals go? 94. What is the maximum damage possible from spills of hazardous materials that may be carried along this highway? What provisions are there to respond to such a spill? 95. What is the expected effect on quality of our surface water and ground water? 96. What is the expected loss of wildlife under each alternative? 97. What effect will there be on the response time of emergency and rescue services along the route? 98. What risks will be imposed on fire personnel? 99. What difficulties are likely for transportation to and from schools? 100. What difficulties may there be for voters travelling to the polls? 101. What effect will there be on retail businesses along US 220, such as those in Boones Mill? The Process 102. In Virginia, how many times has public comment caused change to be made to plans for a highway project? 103. Will comments like mine be considered and analyzed, or just filed and neglected, as seems to have been the case with my past criticism of the road closing in the Moneta business district? How long should I wait for answers to my questions? 104. What is the next step in this process? Peace,